DSP Robotics Support

Apparently, the .fsm I've attached on Wed Feb 26, 2020 6:45 pm, doesn't help. Sorry.

Try compressing by using a signal filtered by the same stuff used in LU filters. It sounds awesome and it doesn't tweak as much in the way of bass. I might suggest actually that LU compression and limiting is the best, better than peak or RMS IMO.

You'd have to find the VSTplug tools for that LU filter I'd posted.

wlangfor@uoguelph.ca wrote:You'd have to find the VSTplug tools for that LU filter I'd posted.

Unfortunately, a "LU filter" search on Flowstone forum, returns nothing. Can you please tell what's a LU filter?

steph_tsf wrote:

wlangfor@uoguelph.ca wrote:You'd have to find the VSTplug tools for that LU filter I'd posted.

Unfortunately, a "LU filter" search on Flowstone forum, returns nothing. Can you please tell what's a LU filter?

Here's My new schematic with tools for improving a compressor and other things:
http://dsprobotics.com/support/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=38514

and here's a link to that LU filter:
http://dsprobotics.com/support/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=34618

GL

I'll move some of those schematics to the user examples section.

FWIW, for those that have access to a mac and haven't tried it - the AU Multicompressor is an awesome piece of software. I've done a lot of live recording where I only had limited control over sudden changes in source levels/balances, and just processing these with this compressor using the default settings makes a very unpleasantly unbalanced recording very listenable, with no pumping or other distracting artifacts. Like magic. It's a multiband compressor that adjusts levels of different frequency bands individually, as needed for that band.

steph_tsf wrote:

wlangfor@uoguelph.ca wrote:You'd have to find the VSTplug tools for that LU filter I'd posted.

Unfortunately, a "LU filter" search on Flowstone forum, returns nothing. Can you please tell what's a LU filter?

I never heard of a "LU filter". I can tell you what LU means, but I guess you already know. It stands for "loudness unit" and is a new form of measurement introduced to fight the overloud, flat compressed songs that were out there for a few years. On the computer, the measurement is done in LUFS, where FS stands for "in relation to full scale" and says nothing else than that the finite digital realm is used, where 0 refers to -inf dB and 1 to 0 dB. In LUFS, one LU refers to one dB in change.
This system was introduced to have a common way of restricting loudness to certain maximum levels. It is never measured as peak values, but always in windows, with lengths M (=momentary, 400ms) and S (=short term, 3 seconds). It is therefore quite similar to rms, but LU measurement involves a gate as well to rule out noise.
There are several recommendations from tv, radio and webhoster, like -23 LUFS, or -14 LUFS. That means, producers should aim for these levels, as the program is limiting to these values. Sometimes it is coupled with requirements to dBTP (TP = true peak, calculated by interpolating subsamples).

As you can see, an "LU filter" does not make much sense as a term. But maybe something else is meant.

tulamide wrote:There are several recommendations from tv, radio and webhoster, like -23 LUFS, or -14 LUFS.

So, in real life, that's -23 for program content and -14 for ads?

wlangfor@uoguelph.ca, could you please articulate something about the "LU filter" you recommended?

steph_tsf wrote:wlangfor@uoguelph.ca, could you please articulate something about the "LU filter" you recommended?

an LU filters employs C-weighting. Because of this; it passes to the enevlope to remove less db's. This means like an elliptical filters there's less tweaking when detecting bass signal for the filter; ultimately less distortion.

I found I enjoy the sound of an enevelope controller that is first through an LU filter. But then again; the perfection of RMS is tempting; but seemingly artificial.

wlangfor@uoguelph.ca, could you please articulate something in plain english about the "LU filter" you recommended?